MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055683103 · doi:10.1083/jcb.200701122

Tripin/hSgo2 recruits MCAK to the inner centromere to correct defective kinetochore attachments

2007· article· en· W2055683103 on OpenAlexaff
Haomin Huang, Jie Feng, Jakub K. Famulski, J. B. Rattner, Song Tao Liu, Gary D. Kao, Ruth J. Muschel, Gordon K. Chan, Tim J. Yen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsKinetochoreCentromereBUB1AnaphaseCell biologyAurora B kinaseChromosome segregationSpindle checkpointBiologyGeneticsChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

hSgo2 (previously annotated as Tripin) was recently reported to be a new inner centromere protein that is essential for centromere cohesion (Kitajima et al., 2006). In this study, we show that hSgo2 exhibits a dynamic distribution pattern, and that its localization depends on the BUB1 and Aurora B kinases. hSgo2 is concentrated at the inner centromere of unattached kinetochores, but extends toward the kinetochores that are under tension. This localization pattern is reminiscent of MCAK, which is a microtubule depolymerase that is believed to be a key component of the error correction mechanism at kinetochores. Indeed, we found that hSgo2 is essential for MCAK to localize to the centromere. Delocalization of MCAK accounts for why cells depleted of hSgo2 exhibit kinetochore attachment defects that go uncorrected, despite a transient delay in the onset of anaphase. Consequently, these cells exhibit a high frequency of lagging chromosomes when they enter anaphase. We confirmed that hSgo2 is associated with PP2A, and we propose that it contributes to the spatial regulation of MCAK activity within inner centromere and kinetochore.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations136
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207